Childcare Bill

I thank noble Lords for their contributions to this small but very interesting debate. Clause 11 replaces and expands the existing legislation under Section 118A of the School Standards and Framework Act 1998. The existing duty already requires local authorities to review the sufficiency of childcare in their area annually, but it does not require them to take any action in light of what they find from that annual review. Clause 11, on the other hand, will require local authorities to undertake an assessment of childcare provision within a year of the commencement date of legislation and then at least every three years after that. That is not to say only every three years, as we have said before, particularly in the light of the views expressed on this by the noble Earl, Lord Listowel, but at least every three years. Without such an assessment, the local authority will not know whether there are gaps in provision and will not know what action to take to fill them. It is an integral part of the series of clauses linked to the duty to secure sufficient childcare in Clause 6. Standardised and public assessments will provide transparency and comparability within, and between, local authorities for the benefit of parents, the inspectorate and for local authorities themselves. The clause and regulations made under powers contained in it will ensure that parents’ views will be heard in the assessment, helping to create a childcare market that is responsive to their needs. We have published an updated policy paper outlining our intentions on the childcare sufficiency assessment, which builds on the initial paper that we issued in Committee in another place. Several Members of the Committee have looked at that and copies of both papers are available in the Library. As the noble Baroness, Lady Walmsley, said, Amendment No. 35 would require the Secretary of State to publish an assessment of the sufficiency of childcare provision every two years. There are three reasons why the Government cannot accept the amendment. The first is that Clause 11 already places a duty on local authorities to carry out an assessment of childcare provision. Childcare markets are highly localised, so local authorities are best placed to assess supply and demand and help shape their local markets to meet parents’ needs. The Government would not wish to duplicate the important duty contained in Clause 11, as two parallel systems would be inefficient and burdensome. Secondly, we do not agree that the approach taken by this amendment would be the most effective way of achieving the objective of holding local authorities to account, which we all want to see. It is, of course, vitally important that we have strong systems in place to monitor the performance of local authorities as they progress towards sufficiency, and as such we have worked to build the sufficiency duty into the joint area review process and will feed into their annual performance assessment and comprehensive performance assessment rating. The Secretary of State will have powers to intervene, as he does at present, but will do so on the basis of the joint area review evidence, not through seeking to second-guess in some way the assessment that the authority has undertaken. Thirdly, Amendment No. 35 would require the Government to collect data every two years from local authorities. However, Amendment No. 35 does not change Clause 11, which places a duty on local authorities to assess the sufficiency of childcare provision every three years, albeit with regular reviews of that assessment in between. The fact that two out of three assessments will not occur in the same year would not provide a set of comparable results. Finally, I reassure the Committee that the provisions in Clause 11, and forthcoming supporting regulations and guidance, will cover the need to ensure that there are enough free early education places provided under Clause 7. The Bill brings both early education and childcare together, and disposes of the legal distinction between them. It is therefore essential that assessments of sufficiency cover all types of childcare that children receive. The noble Lord, Lord Northbourne, is right—there is an enormous variety of childcare and we do not want to lump it all together. We want to ensure that that diversity is not only maintained but is expanded. In all walks of life today people want more choice and want their services more customised. We see that not only in education but also in health and right across the spectrum. There would be a public reaction if we tried to, as it were, nationalise the provision. Amendment No. 42 would put on the face of the Bill some specific items that the local authority’s assessment of the sufficiency of local childcare should include. We will specify what should be covered by these childcare sufficiency assessments in the regulations and guidance made under Clause 11. The childcare sufficiency assessment policy paper describes how local authorities will be required to conduct a comprehensive assessment of both the demand for childcare and the supply of childcare places available for all families and specific target groups. This will be updated regularly and at least every three years. We are currently working with the Local Government Association and a group of local authorities to develop best practice models and toolkits so that the good work already happening can be shared among all local authorities. Regulations will set out that the local authority’s assessment of childcare provision must cover both demand and supply sides of the market locally to highlight any gaps. I hope that meets the noble Baroness’s point. At present many local authorities undertake some sort of assessment of the supply side, but they do not generally assess need and demand. The regulations will set out specific matters to be taken into account in both parts of the assessment—the supply and the demand. In addition, if we list these matters on the face of the Bill as matters which the assessment must include, this may result in unduly restricting the rest of the content of the assessment. It is therefore preferable to use regulations and guidance to provide additional detail. The noble Baroness, Lady Walmsley, asked a number of questions. I am in a position now to give her some answers, but, if she will allow me, I shall supplement them in writing. She asked about affordability. We propose to say in guidance that local authorities should assess parental demand at the current market price, what price would be considered affordable by local parents, and what demand would be at that affordable price. Guidance will explain how local authorities determine market price in their area. That will allow local authorities to understand both active demand and the maximum level of demand that they would face if they were able to incentivise providers to bring down prices. As I say, I shall supplement in writing any points which the noble Baroness put to me that that explanation does not cover. With regard to Amendments Nos. 44 and 45, the noble Earl, Lord Listowel, has expressed through this amendment sentiments that I think we all agree with—that well qualified staff are vital for the delivery of high quality childcare and early education services leading to improved outcomes for children. That is a central element of our 10-year childcare strategy, where we set out our commitment to a radical reform of the early years and childcare workforce through a new qualifications and career structure. That has been taken forward through the children’s workforce strategy; and, as I mentioned earlier, the transformation fund, totalling £250 million of additional funding over the period 2006-08, has been made available to drive forward graduate-level professional leadership and better qualified staff, particularly in private and voluntary sector early years settings. I shall certainly write to the noble Earl on the other points that he has made today. The Government have already set a target that all children’s centres and full daycare settings will have professional leaders delivering the early years foundation stage in place by 2015. We are using the transformation fund to kick start this work in the private, voluntary and independent full day care settings in 2006-08, supplementing the funding for children’s centres already available through the general Sure Start grant. Amendment No. 44 would put on the face of the Bill a requirement for local authorities to include within the assessment of childcare sufficiency details of childcare practitioners within settings who are qualified to national vocational level 6. I think that the noble Lord means graduate level as there are, in fact, no national vocational qualifications at level 6. Amendment No. 45 would put on the face of the Bill a similar requirement for local authorities to include within their assessments of childcare sufficiency details of staff within settings who are qualified to level 3. I am assuming that ““childcare practitioners”” means all staff working directly with children without supervision or supervising other staff working directly with children. As Members of the Committee will be aware from the paper that my noble friend made available to them, the assessment will cover supply and demand within local markets so local authorities can identify how best to deal with any gaps in provision. It will not be just an assessment of parents’ requirements regarding the quantity of childcare, but also of their requirements for the quality of that childcare. I understand the noble Lord’s concern that childcare is of suitable quality and I share his belief that a suitably qualified workforce is essential, but I do not believe that these amendments are the best way to achieve that. In fact, the minimum qualifications requirements for registration by Ofsted give assurance about standards of workforce quality. These currently state that all supervisors have to be qualified to level 3 and half of all other staff to level 2 in qualifications that are appropriate for the care or development of children. The development of the early years foundation stage will also provide greater impetus to providers to encourage more of their workforce to achieve the level 2 and 3 qualifications appropriate to their roles. This will give assurance that childcare is not only sufficient but of good quality. We are very serious about the achievement of those standards. In addition, quality indicators will be covered in detail in regulations, particularly those setting out registration requirements and the duty to implement the early years foundation stage in Part 3 of the Bill. Amendment No. 43 would give the Government the power to specify the qualifications, experience and expertise of the local authority officials who are engaged in the preparation of childcare assessments. While I agree with the noble Lord’s view that those carrying out this type of work for local authorities need to be suitably qualified, I do not think that it is appropriate to seek to put in place arrangements whereby central government would determine for local government matters which are more properly for the employer—the local authority. Ofsted assesses local authorities’ performance on children’s services through annual performance assessments and joint area reviews. These arrangements focus on the results of local authorities’ actions in respect of their duties and provide the best basis for ensuring proper performance of functions. As we made clear in the policy paper, local authorities will be given guidance on how best to deliver their duties under this clause of the Bill. This will set out clearly what steps a local authority will have to take to assess the nature and extent of the demand for, and the supply of, childcare in their area. Finally, we are working closely with the Local Government Association and a group of 12 local authorities to develop these practical tools and materials to support local authorities in the effective delivery of their duties and to share good practice, so we are not leaving local authorities rudderless, as it were. We are looking to ensure that those which are already ensuring best practice will be able to disseminate it. Through efforts such as this, and the extensive funding going to local authorities through the general Sure Start grant, I believe that we are making appropriate support available to ensure that they will be best positioned in terms of the expertise and experience of their staff to carry out their duties. I was asked by the noble Baroness, Lady Morris, about the rules for free entitlement and paying PVI providers covered by the code of practice that my noble friend Lord Adonis mentioned earlier. In the main the rules do not change with the exception of extending the number of hours and weeks. Again, that is a bit of shorthand, so I will write to the noble Baroness. I hope that that gives her something to be going on. On the noble Lord’s question, and I will write to him on the detail, we are very alive to the fact that while we have to for shorthand purposes use a phrase such as ““childcare,”” there are levels of care and education from birth onwards that we must be open to, and that we have to ensure we are meeting so far as resources, standards of training for providers and facilities are concerned. My noble friend has said in the course of this afternoon and in previous debates on the Bill that we have put, and will continue to put, substantial resources into all levels of education and care so far as this Bill is concerned.